Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 8, 2015 12:30pm-1:01pm PDT

12:30 pm
this? it's very difficult for me to sit here and listen to because i know this man's character, i know his family and i know how he ran his campaign because i was there at the very gestation of it. and he is above question the most highest integrity person that i know and that has done some fabulous work for the city and i introduced him to a few people i knew in the business community and everyone of them asking the same thing, idea you run for supervisor, you have a lovely wife, a family, great job. what are you thinking? he said, i was born in san francisco, i was raised here, i have my family here and i want to make it a better place for san francisco and for city san
12:31 pm
franciscans here. that's what's carried out every step of the way. to follow this and hear more of this stuff today and see there is absolutely nothing that's come up in all of these years of investigations and serious people involved in this, there is nothing that even vaguely ties him to maybe conjecture that he may have had a jamba juice with one of these people that live on pacific heights. i know mark and raising a family, running a campaign, he wasn't sitting around at the bay club having mimosas. he was out trying to get elected. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> charles marsel. i just want to say that i'm disappointed the
12:32 pm
supervisor didn't come here and make his case. i'm saying that's really the problem is that he perhaps was advised to stay away and i think that was a mistake because i think there are unanswered questions that he could have come here to address directly. i don't know if you could have asked him questions or if that would have been appropriate, but i sure think there are a lot of questions that still need to be asked of the supervisor directly. >> any other public comment? >> chair, i have a question. can we seek advice from the city attorney? >> on what? >> on the legality on the statute and is that something that should be handled in public or closed
12:33 pm
session. >> item no. 6 was the contingency that any commissioner wanted to confer with the city attorney. so that if you would like to invoke a request that we go into closed session so that you can discuss it with the city attorney, you can so, we will move to agenda item 6 before we vote on the outstanding motion. >> could i, i don't mean to interrupt you, commissioner. just a suggestion and we are following up. if we do that, and that's fine with me that if we seek city attorney's advice in what the city attorney thinks. i think we ought to do it publically. we often get advice from
12:34 pm
the city attorney, we are asking him all the time in public and see what he thinks. i know what's going to happen and it's fine. i know what he's going to say because we've all seen the memorandum as prepared by disclosing anything that is not in existence of the memorandum. i'm content with having this discussion openingly in terms of what the city attorney thinks related to the statute of limitations and i think the public should be pure view to that as well. i didn't mean to interrupt your motion. >> on the issue of whether or not it can be public or not. what i worry is that given the subject matter, given that we've been, isn't that basically a waiver that we are opening it
12:35 pm
all up which i don't know that we can do, but i'm looking to the city attorney. >> if you wish to discuss the legal issues presented at this hearing, i would request we discuss it in closed session. >> the question is do we have to do it in closed session ? you might prefer something, but is it something we have to do in closed session. we get your advice all the time in open session. >> let me, i guess, let me call and ask commissioner hur to make a motion under agenda item 6 that we go into closed session and see if you get a second. because if the commission as a group is prepared to stay in public
12:36 pm
session, they obviously have a right. >> sure. i am curious to the answer to commissioner keane's question. is that just your preference, do you see that as a requirement, what do you mean by that? >> for the purpose of this requirement that we should discuss it in closed session. >> why the requirement? >> given this matter, i think it's in the best interest of the commission, best interest of the city to discuss these issues in closed session. >> i will make a motion then. >> i would like to interject one point. i will be very brief. >> i think i will let him have his motion first. can i have a second to the motion. >> second. >> what's your comment? >> my point is in regard to the privilege like any privilege, the
12:37 pm
privilege is held by the clients. we are the clients. it's not held by the lawyer. so if the clients want to wave the privilege. the fact that the lawyer says, well, no, no, you shouldn't wave the privilege. went the ones that can make that decision. the fact that he's uncomfortable with it is irrelevant. the idea that we have to do it even though we have the privilege and don't want to do it is simply that he's wrong on it. >> i don't want to do it. >> i'm suggesting that we should. >> any public comment on the motion to go into closed session on item no. 6? >> i'm bob plant hold. i want
12:38 pm
to concur with commissioner keane that the commission had to decide. if you do go into closed session would you at least make known to the public what issues you are going to discuss that way we better understand when you come out of closed session what might be the basis for your decision if everything is held saccharo saint, we are lost. we are adrift. if you go into closed session, it's a good idea to air this because so much has been kept hidden, unstated, unasked. at least let the public know what are the issues you are going to ask. thank you. >> commissioner, hur, you want to say what it is the question that, i understand, but i want to respond to what is the question that you
12:39 pm
envision us to be discussing in closed session. >> the topics is the statute of limitations. >> okay. >> hello, commissioners, larry bush. i think it's hard to imagine given my experience with the city attorney's office that you are going to get any advice other than the fact that the provision that would find that the statute of limitations applies and would represent with this commission with whatever it decide. which is not a hard call. everyday, i saw it so many times when i worked in the mayor's office. that's what comes back, you are likely to lost but we will represent you. you had an irony working on this and it's been hidden for months to allow the statute to expire and now you want to have a discussion to
12:40 pm
discuss whether or not the expiration should also be done in closed session. it's not good. thank you. charles, again. yes, all the optics has never been good. it would be a disaster for this body to rescind this letter personally because i think, in fact, it's necessary for you to rescind this draft. and let it go ahead under a forfeiture and you can imagine how it would go to the public and it doesn't help your reputation at all. the chair made a reference to item no. 6. are you planning to take up the executive
12:41 pm
session with the city attorney on the next item on this matter as well? item no. you kept referring to item 6. this is item 5. >> i said that item 6 was placed on there in case it was necessary for us to go into closed session to deal with item 5. >> both issues? >> yes. >> so you would be doing item 5 and item 6 which i assume has to do with one -- 1114. >> correct. >> okay. that was your thinking. okay, the public wasn't too clear on that. i understand. >> i will say just for everybody to understand is that item 5 is still open. and if we go into executive session and come out. we are going to deal with item 5 as well in public. any
12:42 pm
other public comment? all right. i will call the question. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? >> no. >> it appears the ayes have it 3- 2. we will go >> all right. the commission is back in public session. the commission has voted not to disclose what was specifically what was discussed in closed session except to advise that no
12:43 pm
decisions were made as a result of that closed session in the closed session. >> we'll now go back to item 5 where there is outstanding supervisor keane's motion. you want to repeat it so it's clear. >> we need to vote on the closed session in public. the same thing again. >> except the fact that we made no decisions in it. >> all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? >> i should have public comment before i take a vote. but i think given the time. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? it's carried unanimously. we'll now go back
12:44 pm
to item 5. whef we have appending the motion. mr. keane? >> yes, i move that the commission overall -- over rule the petition to waiver. >> by that you mean not sending the letter? >> correct. public comment? hearing no public comment, i call the question. a couple things i would like to say. first of all. i don't think the matter before us is an issue whether supervisor ferrell committed
12:45 pm
fraud or any wrongdoing. i really don't think that's the issue before us. my view on this has nothing to do with whether or not he did or didn't. that's not what we are here to do i certainly don't want to i am pun his his integrity. but i will say that i think this is a close call. i will say i think there are legal and factual disputes regarding statute of limitations. >> any other comment? i will also add to what commissioner said and that is we are not making a finding in support of this motion at least i'm not making
12:46 pm
a finding that supervisor sd ferrell did or did not violate the campaign laws covered by the stipulations by the fppc. what i am saying is those findings by the fppc did demonstrate an egregious violation of the campaign ordinances. and for us to say we are going to put it under the rug and waive it, i'm not prepared to do. let it take it's course and let some other fact finding body take the correctness and determine whether or not supervisor ferrell did or did not file in those campaigns. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? it's carried
12:47 pm
unanimously. >> turning to item 7 which is adjournment. i guess i don't need public comment on that. so we'll declare ourselves adjourned. [ meeting is adjourned ] >> >> >> to address these concerns i
12:48 pm
have made a series of amendments to the resolution that capture the spirit of the policy but would allow continued conversation with the task force and other stakeholders about how we do metering. i believe strongly that the city needs to start developing toes to help create affordable housing. in our housing element alone, we talk about building a 60% affordable, but we are currently not doing that. it is important to start the discussion about creating tools of measuring our affordable housing and creating tools to enforce that. i grew up in new york city, one to my parents who had immigrated here to the u.s. actually, i started really becoming active in working with the community when i was in high school. came out to california for college, went to stanford. i was always politically involved. when i was a college student, i
12:49 pm
worked on the initiative to get rid of affirmative action in our public government system. currently we have 3 legislative items that are pending. the first is going to be coming to a final vote on tuesday, our mid-market uptown tenderloin task exemption legislation. it is basically an incentive to encourage businesses to come to mid-market. in particular where we have the highest commercial vacancy. and then when i graduated moved out to san francisco about 12 years ago. i always loved sanford cisco in college, and i just wanted to try it out. i started working in economic development policy. i was a community organizer for six years. i worked with young people parents, and families around issues that concern our neighborhoods, whether it was improving muni lines affordable
12:50 pm
housing, public schools or just planning issues in neighborhoods. we just had a hearing last week, and we are trying to do some work around bedbug enforcement, which is a major issue in the tenderloin and of hill and 63. a hearing will actually be on thursday, april 7, 10:30. we're doing our first hearing on pedestrian safety. i think public safety is a huge concern. it ranges from both low-level crimes to pedestrian safety, and so that is a really important issue to me. we are probably more than double what every other district has. and that are preventable. and we can do better. district 6 is one -- home to one of the most diverse constituencies. we have the poorest residents in san francisco. we have lgbt. we have immigrants people of color youth, and a high proportion of seniors in the
12:51 pm
city as well. we heard that people want to see more jobs, want to see access to more jobs for our residents. we want to see more preventive instead of just reactive. we want to see after-school programs versus the police picking them up because they are out on the street, which i think our chief agrees with. i actually ran for the board of education in san francisco and got to serve a term on our school board. what really surprised me was how much i enjoyed it. i loved it. i love meeting with families, meeting with youth, meeting with teachers, visiting schools, and getting a deeper understanding of what it means to make our system work better. the one thing i really enjoyed was i got to run within a district instead of citywide was that i really got to know voters and residents. i actually enjoy campaigning more because i had time to knock on doors and the voters
12:52 pm
individually. i'd love it. i actually really enjoyed being out on the field. so i spent a lot of time doing it because i got to really get a deeper understanding of what people care about and what people's concerns are and also what people loved about the district and the city. i was talking with the mayor yesterday. he was very interested in seeing how the good work with our office -- how he could work with our office. i would love to see how we could support small businesses because they are the heart at san francisco. they provide 60% 07% of the jobs in sanford cisco, and they provide it locally, and they are not going to offshore their jobs any time. i am not an opponent of cleaning up the tenderloin. i love the tenderloin. i love what is right now. i recognize we have a diversity of books that live there and people do not want to see open drug dealing. i do not have a problem with people lit think -- people out on the street socializing. i think that is good.
12:53 pm
that to me is more -- you know it is part of the character of the neighborhood. i get to represent one of the most exciting and dynamic districts in the city. it is where change is happening, so i think it is exciting in terms of how we can model what it means to be a smart growth neighborhood, how we can use transit and housing effectively to serve our city and also to do a lot of the new green policies that we have developed over the last 10 years. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ in well with the innovation
12:54 pm
capital world i can't think of a better k with the wifi connection in our city it is crossing different economic lines and neighborhoods it helps not only young people with their education but regular folks to find out where their muni bus is or their routine or opportunities in the city it was lead by the department the of technology they've proven themselves they wanted to take on such a great responsibility on market street i want to thank the department of technology they've found great partners with marcus in the valley along with mayor 42 boss of them gave
12:55 pm
us very expensive equipment to use but also gave us some great guidance how to do that the combination of the public private partnering was another compliment off our department the government some work with the technology to do those sorts of exist things and compliments all the things we're trying to do to use technology in a positive woo san francisco is one of the greatest city's in the world and suddenly give a support to a service that - wifi is a utility like power and water and it has to be available i think in all the public venues >> i will live in oakland i'm here on microsoft a lot and not familiar with the area especially the part of market street so be able to navigate
12:56 pm
around is really, really helpful and i appreciate the fact the city is doing it's civic duty in providing a connection to everyone there was a huge manpower effort 3 shops involved with the overhead the underground cable company and the radio shop doing all the turn on and trouble shooting all of the shops put in at least 3 months of manpower hours time and six or eight people in each shop no issues are the app the access ptsz points out to the system there were a sophisticated innocent that was broadcasting the signal ate. >> as far as mobile devices we can use a public-private partnering to hit up the
12:57 pm
corridors corridors across the city where people traverse with small businesses and transit corridors and they want to get online with their education folks connecting with friends are looking for a job i think we have a lot of people in the city veterans they're not just on market street they're all over the city and want that. >> it is an old market street has been did you live up several times since installed we had to run links to link the conduits system to get the links to the fiber $3.1 million is a lot to pull that is the fiber to our shop procuring it getting it to the job.
12:58 pm
>> we pay a good amount of taxes in san francisco it would easy the burden to have access r sees to wifi we won't have to pay egregious cell phone bills when they can connect to the intersect is it so kind of silly why not. >> free internet and wifi is a way forward for the division of the city across the country oakland and san jose and chicago and filled we're saying we want our families and kids particular from backgrounds with they're used a to be an great deprived people can look for jobs or a game for the 21st century is it it is about making sure we take care of the
12:59 pm
1:00 pm
today, we're honored to have mayor ed lee here to present the city's budget for the next 2 hundred and 50 millin dollar years mayor ed lee welcome floor is yours. >> thank you good morning, everyone. >> good morning. >> thank you supervisor president london breed and budget and supervisor mar farrell and members of the board our elected the officials and commissioners and department heads and labor our wonderful community leaders thank you very much for being here and thank you all for being such a great partner in helping me deliver to the people of san francisco a balanced budget that sets our city up for lesson